-
Deceased January 15th, 2016

Originally Posted by
Gil9713
It could be simply something like an identifier for the Royal London Regiment
Except the London Regiment did not, and still does not, have a "Royal"
-
01-09-2014 09:46 AM
# ADS
Friends and Sponsors
-
Advisory Panel
As it has AJP on the barrel and Parker Hale on the receiver, I'm guessing that at some point these were on two different rifles.
-
-
-
Contributing Member
Beerhunter,
Take that totally on board, however,the title Royal London and my suggestion of (Regiment(s) was no more than that, could account for RLR on the rifle. In the late 19th into the early 20th Century Royal London was stretched in Military history to include many Regiments of the line, some UK
based, but many of which were Canadian based to for example:
Royal London Fusiliers Monument - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Royal London title was often stitched prefacing lots of Regiments, don't ask me why specifically Royal Lincolnshire Regiment/Royal Leicestershire Regiment but also Royal Labrador Regiment which later became the Royal Newfoundland Regiment in Canada
many at the time the Lee Speed was being developed.
So my theory and hopefully helpful suggestion was merely for the melting pot, as I know from my own Regiment we stamped EVERYTHING as we rarely gave things back once broken
'Tonight my men and I have been through hell and back again, but the look on your faces when we let you out of the hall - we'd do it all again tomorrow.' Major Chris Keeble's words to Goose Green villagers on 29th May 1982 - 2 PARA
-
-
Deceased January 15th, 2016
I have never heard of the Royal Fusiliers being called (even informally) the Royal "London" Fusiliers and I was around when they were extant! They were the Royal Fusiliers (City of London Regiment).
Nor have I heard of any regiment being called, even informally, as the Royal London anything. I speak as an ex-member of the oldest Regiment of London. Or, as far as we are concerned, anywhere else in the UK
for that matter :-)
As to why some regiments are Royal and others are not it is because the "Royal" has to be earned or inherited. e.g the former Royal Hampshire Regiment (1946) and the latter: the Royal Air Force's Army antecedents - Royal Engineers and from them the Royal Flying Corps. Or the Royal Signals, also from the Royal Engineers.
Last edited by Beerhunter; 01-09-2014 at 12:17 PM.
Reason: typo
-
Contributing Member
Oh thats why my Regiment never became ROYAL then, we couldn't have earnt it or been involved in enough battles ??
Last edited by Gil Boyd; 01-09-2014 at 12:33 PM.
'Tonight my men and I have been through hell and back again, but the look on your faces when we let you out of the hall - we'd do it all again tomorrow.' Major Chris Keeble's words to Goose Green villagers on 29th May 1982 - 2 PARA
-
-
Deceased January 15th, 2016

Originally Posted by
Gil9713
Oh thats why my Regiment never became ROYAL then, we couldn't have earnt it or been involved in enough battles ??
Maybe some one didn't ask. I agree is is an anomaly. Perhaps someone should take it with your Colonel in Chief. He aught to have some pull with his mother.
My old Regiment, in spite of its age and record, is also not Royal - merely Honourable. :-)
Last edited by Beerhunter; 01-09-2014 at 01:38 PM.
-
Contributing Member
-
-
Advisory Panel

Originally Posted by
Thunderbox
I don't think that terminology has ever been used in
UK
?
In that era surely they would mostly have used ".22" RF".
That may well be the case, but it doesn't resemble a regimental marking either IMHO.
Has that marking been seen elsewhere in association with the "Royal London Rifles"?
I'm not even finding a regiment of that name via Google - except a reference in Canada
: "The Royal London Rifles (1st Canadian Regiment)"
Would a regiment have such a tiny little stamp made up - and it is obviously a one-piece stamp - to mark their kit in such a insignificant and unclear way? Seems doubtful to me. They would have something quite a bit larger and more obvious I suspect.
“There are invisible rulers who control the destinies of millions. It is not generally realized to what extent the words and actions of our most influential public men are dictated by shrewd persons operating behind the scenes.”
Edward Bernays, 1928
Much changes, much remains the same. 
-
-
Contributing Member
Yes agree in part, and only threw into the pot the Canadian
angle of the Royal London Regiment or Rifles, because it was on that continent. They are clearly not letters stamped by Parker Hale or any manufacturer and are offset as if an after thought or merely a unit or group identifier as their ownership. I would hedge a bet they were for "Junior Riflemen" to learn to shoot with a Military school or organization, but IMHO a Military unit nevertheless.
'Tonight my men and I have been through hell and back again, but the look on your faces when we let you out of the hall - we'd do it all again tomorrow.' Major Chris Keeble's words to Goose Green villagers on 29th May 1982 - 2 PARA
-
-
Legacy Member
Could it not just be a commercial rifle and not actually have any military affiliation?
-
Thank You to gsimmons For This Useful Post: